Atheists To Hold Massive Rally On National Mall Next Month

Does that massage your atheism beliefs?

 

With all due respect, I never asked a question. I gave you a statement.

 

You accept this kind of testimony in a court of law. Just pointing out the falacy of your so-called argumant.

 

Sure, but the basis is different.

I believe the sun will rise tomorrow. Why? Because the odds of the earth changing its spin over the next few hours is very low.

That faith doesn't require much effort due to the heavy amount of evidence.

I don't believe there is a god, but this disbelief is based on a lack of positive evidence. Reason and logic in the modern context is based on positivism. Positive belief requires evidence. In the absence of evidence, rational skepticism is employed.

 

Hearsay is not admissible in court.

 

He was an occultist, thats true. He no more believed in God than Joe Stalin, who was studying to enter the priesthood before communism ideology enticed him away from the church.

 

In a way yes, if someone found big twenty inch humanoid foot prints in the forest. If someone says it's Bigfoot and you say you don't believe it, then you should be prepared to claim/prove/show what makes you doubt Bigfoot, given the tracks.

It's all very simple.

 

They are not, because you think they are does not make it so. So-called empirism informs your world view that God is not because science and scientists say so.

 

Evolution in itself disproves the bible.

 

Uhm, no.

There are lots of atheists that have no reason for being atheists other than religion is stupid. That in no way is a religious definition. Of course, these aren't the people who will be showing up to the rally.

 

A lot of things have been viewed as legislating immorality over time. I'm sure that's how allowing interracial marriage was viewed by a lot of people not long ago (and still is by some).

However, morality or immorality isn't part of the argument when it comes to most social policy currently in place. Our civil liberties are based on limiting government to the essentials. We have the freedom of speech -- not the imposition of limits on "immoral" speech.

Most Americans understandably view "hate speech" laws as nanny statish. This is a form of "moral" legislating. The societies that have hate speech laws are using their morality to justify censoring speech, but we understandably view that as statist.

So, you can see what happens when a different form of morality is used to justify a law.

This is why most of our civil liberties are based on allowing people to do as they please as long as they aren't hurting someone else. That's not legislating "immorality", it's giving people the freedom of choice.

 

To mother(*)(*)(*)(*) with religion and theism. I hope scientific progress, which Republicans hate, continues to destroy religion and belief in fairy tales.

 

You said that you were open to the possibility that God exists. The only way to find out is to conduct an ivestigation of the case at hand. I only made an offer.

 

It does sound rather silly actually. Thousands of people that believe in nothing getting together in a mall to support their nothingness, possibly hold discussions on nothingness. Unity in nothingness. 'We stand together, united..for no particular reason'.

 

Nope there is no "atheist belief" nor any spirituality or god.

 

Noits not. Beleief is what you intellectually accept regardless of evidence. OJ's jury did not convict him for the same reason.

 

That may be true, but eyewitness testimony is. That is what the gospels are. People who actually saw Jesus perform miricles and his many dees and expressions of his wisdom.

 

No. It doesn't. It confirms the Bible.

 

You are either stupid or a troll. Please tell which.

 

Yet your avatar is a chochra. Just saying.

 

It's meant to look good and be creative. It doesn't mean I believe in anything supernatural

 

Religion: a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith

That's not what I've seen and experienced.

 

You figure it out. You seem smart, if not hateful.

 

Yeah, riigghht.

 

The basis of our legal system is actually very positivist.

People are ruled as either guilty or not guilty. Sometimes, the word "innocent" is used, but it's actually not that simple.

The whole principle of "innocent until proven guilty" is evidence based. In the absence of convincing evidence, you have to assume someone didn't commit a crime. We don't put faith in the defense's argument by default, we simply assume that the prosecution must prove its argument. Even when the prosecution fails, it's less of a clearing of someone's name as it is simply the inability to prove someone's guilt.

Religion can be viewed the same way. I don't have to prove there is no god; you have to prove there is one. The burden of proof is on a positive belief, not the default lack of one.